The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.05 - Sept.-Oct. (2008 vol.25)
pp: 30-37
Peli de Halleux , Microsoft Research
Aditya V. Nori , Microsoft Research India
Sriram K. Rajamani , Microsoft Research India
Wolfram Schulte , Microsoft Research
Nikolai Tillmann , Microsoft Research
Michael Y. Levin , Microsoft Center for Software Excellence
During the last 10 years, code inspection for standard programming errors has largely been automated with static code analysis. During the next 10 years, we expect to see similar progress in automating testing, and specifically test generation, thanks to advances in program analysis, efficient constraint solvers, and powerful computers. Three new tools from Microsoft combine techniques from static program analysis, dynamic analysis, model checking, and automated constraint solving while targeting different application domains.
Software Testing, Automatic Test Generation, Program Verification, Reliability, Security
Peli de Halleux, Aditya V. Nori, Sriram K. Rajamani, Wolfram Schulte, Nikolai Tillmann, Michael Y. Levin, "Automating Software Testing Using Program Analysis", IEEE Software, vol.25, no. 5, pp. 30-37, Sept.-Oct. 2008, doi:10.1109/MS.2008.109
1. J. Larus et al., "Righting Software," IEEE Software, vol. 21, no. 3, May/June 2004, pp. 92–100.
2. J.C. King, "Symbolic Execution and Program Testing," J. ACM, vol. 19, no. 7, 1976, pp. 385–394.
3. P. Godefroid, N. Klarlund, and K. Sen, "DART: Directed Automated Random Testing," Proc. Conf. Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 05), ACM Press, 2005, pp. 213–223.
4. B. Korel, "A Dynamic Approach of Test Data Generation," Proc. IEEE Conf. Software Maintenance (ICSM 90), IEEE CS Press, 1990, pp. 311–317.
5. P. Godefroid, "Model Checking for Programming Languages Using VeriSoft," Proc. Ann. Symp. Principles of Programming Languages (POPL 97), ACM Press, 1997, pp. 174–186.
6. J.E. Forrester and B.P. Miller, "An Empirical Study of the Robustness of Windows NT Applications Using Random Testing," Proc. 4th Usenix Windows System Symp., Usenix Assoc., 2000, pp. 59–68.
7. P. Godefroid, M.Y. Levin, and D. Molnar, "Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing," Proc. 15th Ann. Network and Distributed System Security Symp. (NDSS 08), Internet Society (ISOC), 2008; 10_automated_whitebox_fuzz.pdf.
8. S. Bhansali et al., "Framework for Instruction-Level Tracing and Analysis of Programs," Proc. 2nd ACM/Usenix Int'l Conf. Virtual Execution Environments (VEE 06), ACM Press, 2006, pp. 154–163.
9. Y. Hamadi, Disolver: The Distributed Constraint Solver Version 2.44, tech. report, Microsoft Research, 2006; DisolverWebdisolver.pdf.
10. S. Narayanasamy et al., "Automatically Classifying Benign and Harmful Data Races Using Replay Analysis," Proc. Conf. Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 07), ACM Press, 2007, pp. 22–31.
11. N. Tillmann and W. Schulte, "Parameterized Unit Tests," Proc. 10th European Software Eng. Conf. and 13th ACM SIGSOFTInt'l Symp. Foundations of Software Eng. (ESEC/SIGSOFTFSE), ACM Press, 2005, pp. 241–244.
12. T. Ball and S.K. Rajamani, "Automatically Validating Temporal Safety Properties of Interfaces," Proc. 8th SPIN Workshop (SPIN 01), Springer, 2001, pp. 103–122.
13. N.E. Beckman et al., "Proofs from Tests," Proc. 2008 Int'l Symp. Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA08), ACM Press, 2008, pp. 3–14.
14. P. Godefroid, "Compositional Dynamic Test Generation," Proc. Ann. Symp. Principles of Programming Languages (POPL 07), ACM Press, 2007, pp. 47–54.
6 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool